PDA

View Full Version : 2006Retrospect


PaulHellard
12-24-2006, 11:48 PM
Well here it is! The 2006 Retrospective as voted by the community. Looking back, it has been one of those amazing years with new software, hardware and immense new ways to use them both in full cinema-release productions. Have a read and feel free to comment.

This article was compiled using information gleaned from the thread populated by your posts, so should be seen as a reflective of what 2006 CG items you felt were the best.

http://www.cgnetworks.com/stories/2006_12/cgretro_2006/banner_t.jpg (http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3890)

DDS
12-24-2006, 11:55 PM
fair enough, I don't get tired of checking out number 1 ;)

popol
12-24-2006, 11:57 PM
cool thanks paul !

ErmanSinan
12-25-2006, 01:22 AM
I was expecting it :thumbsup:

JBoskma
12-25-2006, 09:59 AM
Excellent list.
With all due respect I'd ask you guys to change the name of one of the links on the bottom of the last page:
http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3667
It is linked under tthe name of Aaron Sims, where I suppose it should be linked as Aaron McBride.

paultheplumber
12-25-2006, 10:02 AM
Woot! Happy new year! Here's to another great year! :beer:

PhuongDPh
12-25-2006, 03:10 PM
oohoo, Happy New Year, CGTalk !

DMJ
12-25-2006, 06:29 PM
fair enough, I don't get tired of checking out number 1 ;)

Number 15 for me, but thats with all things, different people, different tastes.

I agree that dead mans chest was a visual thing close to a delicatesse, but i don't like seafood :thumbsup:

Now something like "best things (CG wise) expected for 2007"?

Nazirull
12-26-2006, 06:30 AM
Thanks for the list!
It is sad that some of the things has caught me unaware. :sad:

I would love to have a list of the things to be in 2007! :D

Lets do that!:D

MrPositive
12-26-2006, 10:59 AM
Unfortunately, the reason Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead's Man Chest is easily the number one CG occurence is almost completely missed by the summation written in this article. It rules supreme because it's literally the first CG integrated character (Davey Jones) that fooled the masses and experts alike. A huge leap forward in the eventual success and acceptance of CG in cinema and subsequent entertainment mediums.

Ramteen
12-26-2006, 01:11 PM
I my self prefer the animation feature CARS .not cuz I`m a fan of pixar .becuz it was simply amazing and impressed me a lot . from my side I think it was great .by the way I`m not sure if this current comment that I`v dropped in this thread is right . anyway I`m so excited for the new baby of pixar which is realasing on comming summer . Cheers :scream:

pimeto
12-26-2006, 09:11 PM
i like the way you voted the 20 positions.
but i keep wonder wtf is Pixar Cras doing in theare ?
sorry but this is realy i childish cartoonish thinggg, i realy dont find it cool, either cool CG or anything else.
okey, its a demonstration of Pixars renderman, but so what ?
:rolleyes: i keep wonder

feeesh
12-26-2006, 09:17 PM
Mr Positive - hey buddy you should go back and read #1 of the article. :) It mentions that in the #1 spot. PLus Davy Jones wasnt all CG. Mostly was but they did have an actor in his clothing on the set with some mocap spots around the lips and eyes and they replaced part of him as well as another member of the crew. So he is mostly CG but not completely. Besides wouldnt the first successful CG integrated character be that very character in your avatar? Gollem?

feeesh
12-26-2006, 09:19 PM
pimento - Part of the reason is because it is one of the first feature films to use Raytracing in the pipeline with rendering. THat's worth mentioning alone IMO. And it looked just beautiful as a result.

Swizzle
12-26-2006, 09:39 PM
Mr Positive - hey buddy you should go back and read #1 of the article. :) It mentions that in the #1 spot. PLus Davy Jones wasnt all CG. Mostly was but they did have an actor in his clothing on the set with some mocap spots around the lips and eyes and they replaced part of him as well as another member of the crew. So he is mostly CG but not completely. Besides wouldnt the first successful CG integrated character be that very character in your avatar? Gollem?Um, "CG" stands for "computer graphics". Everything you saw onscreen of Davey Jones was computer graphics, even the animation; the completely replaced Nighy with the CG character and the "mocap" was actually just reference video for the animators to go by (I may be slightly off on that one as I think the may have done post-filming mocap). All the dots on Bill Nighy's face and body did was give the animators something to work with and/or copy, and the only reason he had makeup around his mouth and eyes was because they had originally planned to use the real actor's eyes and mouth if the CG ones didn't look realistic enough.

MrPositive
12-27-2006, 11:32 AM
Mr Positive - hey buddy you should go back and read #1 of the article. :) It mentions that in the #1 spot. PLus Davy Jones wasnt all CG. Mostly was but they did have an actor in his clothing on the set with some mocap spots around the lips and eyes and they replaced part of him as well as another member of the crew. So he is mostly CG but not completely. Besides wouldnt the first successful CG integrated character be that very character in your avatar? Gollem?

What!? All of Davy Jones is completely CG, right down to the pupils. This in tow, is what flabbergasted the masses. Yes it used mocap.....so what!? Gollum was fun, believable, and entertaining.....but no one in their right mind thought he was prosthetics. The same cannot be said for Davy Jones.

mech7
12-27-2006, 12:02 PM
This list is kinda fun but sometimes a bit weird why is cars in it? The movie looked ok but it was a pretty bad movie, the bonus movies where better then the real one. Also Playstation 3 above the Wii? Why all that ps3 offers is higher resolution and a bit more polygons while the wii offers a completly new way to play games. Max and Maya 64 bit versions pretty far apart, why what makes the difference both updates 64bit was really the big thing right?

Digit
12-27-2006, 12:03 PM
pimento - Part of the reason is because it is one of the first feature films to use Raytracing in the pipeline with rendering. THat's worth mentioning alone IMO. And it looked just beautiful as a result.

Agreed. It might not be a great Pixar film but it didnt just look beautiful but was also incredibly well animated. God knows how complex those cars must have been to set up too. Techinically the film is amazing, imo.

MrPositive
12-28-2006, 07:21 AM
This list is kinda fun but sometimes a bit weird why is cars in it? The movie looked ok but it was a pretty bad movie, the bonus movies where better then the real one. ?
Well the same thing could be said about Pirates also. Many people abhorred the movie, but it doesn't change the fact that Davy Jones was a collossal event in the history of CG evolution.

Also Playstation 3 above the Wii? Why all that ps3 offers is higher resolution and a bit more polygons while the wii offers a completly new way to play games.?
Once again, this is an article about computer graphics advancement and though the Wii is far more revolutionary in gameplay it has nothing on what the PS3 is doing in advancing CG in games.
Max and Maya 64 bit versions pretty far apart, why what makes the difference both updates 64bit was really the big thing right?
Ok this one I kind of agree with only because Maya's new version added very few features except the 64 bit. But let's be real, nothing on this list other than Davy Jones will have as large an impact on CG graphics creation, speed, and usability as the 64 bit movement. I literally saw the demonstrator at Siggraph barely be able to move 2 identical characters around in the Maya interface with regular Maya and then move around 500 with ease on 64 bit. Then he rendered an ocean scene with a regular computer and Maya in approximately 20 minutes. He rendered the exact same scene on 64 bit in about 10 seconds. Now that's advancement to the nth degree.

CGTalk Moderation
12-28-2006, 07:21 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.